For the second year, under theAudit Commission's so-called ‘harder test' for CPA, councils are doing well, according to the latest figures out this week, and the list is also conspicuous for the absence of basket cases. In 2004, there were 15 councils judged as ‘weak' and one as ‘poor'. The latest figures for 2006 show just five one-star councils. Considering this is also a harder test compared with 2004, the latest results can only be regarded as a success story. Nor is there a sour note to what is otherwise an impressive set of results. CPA anoraks will recall that just over 12 months ago, when the last set of CPA figures – for 2005 – were published by the Audit Commission, the-then chairman, James Strachan, provoked an almighty row with the LGA when he criticised council ‘value for money' performance. What particularly enraged the LGA was that while overall, the CPA scores showed councils doing very well, the interpretation by Mr Strachan suggested the opposite. Anyway, shortly afterwards, Mr Strachan departed, the commission now has a new chairman and the latest CPA scores – latest, that is, being for 2006 – show once again an impressive list of upper-tier councils performing well. And this time, there was no negative spin to spoil the occasion. What is interesting is that the one-star councils are reduced to a handful, and these are a mixed bag, some of which are improving well. The classic basket cases of bygone times such as Hackney and Hull have moved up a star, while Bedfordshire, once the only poor county, also has two stars. Of slight concern is that Bristol and Sandwell have been unable to move up from their one-star slot, while Stoke-on-Trent has become the new kid on the block regarding basket cases, and Lambeth and Rutland have both dropped to one-star. Curiously, the London borough continues to be improving well – as it was apparently in 2005 – despite dropping a place. Nonetheless, these figures show that under the CPA's harder test, councils have continued to show improvement against a backdrop of turbulence and change, which is certainly not the case for other public authorities. Michael Burton Editor, The MJ
